Casino Levy

Er Dr Lee Bee Wah asked the Acting Minister for Community Development, Youth and Sports (a) whether the Ministry will raise the casino levy for Singaporeans so as to discourage them from gambling; (b) whether the Ministry will do away with the annual entry pass to the casinos; and (c) whether the Ministry will consider implementing a similar casino levy for foreign workers.

MG [NS] Chan Chun Sing: I understand the concern that Dr Lee is expressing. Indeed, even though we have put a set of casino social safeguards, let me assure the House that the Government continues to monitor and to review the situation. Nothing is cast in stone, and we are prepared to strengthen our social safeguards as need be.

The entry levy is to signal that gambling is an expense and not a means to make a living, and to discourage casual and impulse gambling. Some believe that a higher levy will be a more effective deterrence. Others worry that increasing the levy will only cause Singaporean visitors to intensify their gambling so as to "max out" the upfront cost of the entry levy. The jury is still out as to which is the likely behaviour of Singaporeans if we raise the levy.

The hon Member also suggested abolishing the annual levy. Some believe that we should abolish the annual levy because it encourages Singaporeans to visit the casinos too frequently. My Ministry shares the concern about frequent gamblers at the casinos. We are studying this issue, which is different from that of impulse gambling. We are also looking at the experience of other countries. In Holland for example, they look out for frequent gamblers and interview them. Depending on their assessment, they may subsequently limit the patron's visits to the casinos or even exclude them. Depending on our assessment of the problem, we may consider different measures to deter frequent gamblers. What we put in place eventually, if any, will have to suit our local context and meet our needs and situation.

While our safeguards are and should be stringent, they should not and cannot replace individual responsibility. Individuals must make the correct decision to gamble responsibly. In our Asian context, we also encourage families to play their part in helping their family members to do what is right. We also encourage families to apply for casino exclusion orders, which is the right instrument if their family members are gambling addicts.

Dr Lee asked about foreign workers. Many foreign workers are financially vulnerable and at risk. At this point in time, to help foreign workers avoid the perils of problem gambling, we are focusing on a targeted approach of combining education and casino exclusions. Such an approach also emphasises individual responsibility. For an individual, Self-Exclusion can be a much more effective upstream safeguard against problem gambling than even a downstream monetary quantum.

As many foreign workers face language barriers in applying for exclusions, the National Council on Problem Gambling (NCPG) has put in place arrangements to enable employers to facilitate foreign workers' application and to encourage their foreign workers to be prudent. The results have been encouraging. As at 31 October 2011, we have more than 26,000 Self-Exclusions by foreigners in force. We expect the numbers to continue to rise. NCPG will continue to work with MOM and employers to advise foreign workers to apply for Self-Exclusion.

Page: 705

I have said earlier that my Ministry is prepared to strengthen social safeguards as and when necessary. One upcoming change is the tightening of advertising and promotions by the casinos. We will soon amend the Casino Control (Advertising) Regulations to make it crystal clear to both casinos that they cannot target the domestic market. The Regulations will also be widened to cover not only advertisements but any promotion of the casinos, which should prevent incidents like the heartland shuttle buses. We will make further announcements in due course.

In closing, let me assure the hon Member and this House that my Ministry is monitoring the situation closely. We do not foreclose any possibility and will evolve our social safeguards to address our needs and circumstance.